Dealing with passive resistence

(c) daveknapik, Flickr

This is a favourite subject of mine.  There are lots of slogans in this world that deal with change management – “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is the mantra of the cautious.  ”if you aren’t moving forwards, you’re going backwards” is innovator’s cry.  If you get to the point where you start hearing “stop flogging a dead horse” then it’s probably time to stop wondering which slogan holds more truth and to start doing something about your situation.

The trouble is, that’s when the real work starts.  Of course, you can delay the moment by setting up a work group, or issuing a draft proposal and asking for comments , but the day is going to come when you have to make the change.  It’s at that point you realise that your opponents (and whatever you believe, you do have them!) are well-armed and thoroughly trained in putting a brake on your campaign to conquer the brave new world at your doorstep.

The first weapon of choice for such people is, “what if…” and believe me, this is a potent enemy of the innovator.  It’s supporters proclaim the need for a thorough understanding of the new concept, including any possible issues that just might crop up somewhere along the line.  The what if game is, of course, a variation on the four-year-olds’ favourite game – “Why?”  A well-practised kid can bring otherwise stable parent close to a nervous breakdown with seven repetitions of this simple question.  The problem is that the parent’s final sanction, “because I say so,” doesn’t usually work in the adult world and even more rarely in a teachers’ staff meeting.

I watched a very skilled headmaster blow the what if tactic out of the water.  Having allowed the discussion to continue for a while, he asked the meeting, “Is anyone here actually against implementing the new system?”  This is playing hard ball.  Few professional delayers want to openly show dissension, they prefer to use “concern” as their motive.  No-one was prepared to oppose the idea outright.  The headmaster wrapped up the discussion.  ”Good, then we’ll phase in the new system starting on the 1st of next month and deal with any issues as they arise.”

In the same way that expecting to get all the kids in your class up to the pass standard is usually counter-productive, continuing the negotiations until everyone in a department agrees is a recipe for never changing anything.

What it really comes down to is, how much do you want the change you are advocating?  If it’s important to you, then unanimity, consensus and diplomacy are your enemies.  Harmonious staff rooms exist only in Utopia and the sooner you accept that the better.  Smoothing out arguments and negotiating is playing into the hands of your adversaries.  Before you know it, your plans are so watered down, they are rendered almost useless.  Failure is pre-programmed.

It all comes down to what sort of institution you want to work in.  You can accept the status quo and let the professional objectors have their comfortable life, of you can rattle a few cages and maybe reduce your own personal frustration levels.  And maybe, just maybe, a few of your colleagues will thank you for your efforts somewhere down the line.